warthog64

Sorry I was confused about what you meant, I'll give that a try. Thanks

Is that the only option? I'd like to keep the data.ini in order to add weapon types and pilot models. If it's the only option I'll do it, but why is it just the Mystere that has this issue? No other stock aircraft with the same data.ini entries has this issue.

Thanks for sharing

Very cool idea and beautiful job on the aircraft. The beefy landing gear on the F1 always reminded me of a naval aircraft.

I've noticed that after reinstalling SF2NA and then installing the expansion pack that all enemy icons have disappeared from the map view when playing the game. The icons were there when I first installed the game and flew a mission to check if the install worked, but after installing the expansion pack they all disappeared. I have no idea what to do. Any ideas? Thanks

Thanks! I did search first bit I guess I didn't notice this particular thread.

Yeah I didn't read the article, just the headline and first few sentences as I too thought what you originally thought. That is stupidly close, glad it didn't result in a midair.

Nothing new, remember the 2001 incident when the Chinese plane actually collided with a USN P-3 when the interceptor flew way too close? That enemy pilot was also just trying to show off and scare the P-3 crew and made a huge mistake. This was just a similar pilot trying to scare the crew of the P-8, I agree it's unprofessional as the article says but it's definitely not the first time it has happened. At least this particular pilot knew not to fly too close and cause a potential midair.

Any idea why a certain terrain would only allow you to fly sorties at night? It only happens in certain terrains and not all of them under one install, so it's not a game issue. I'll set the mission to occur at 14:00 for example, yet it is nighttime once the mission starts. Oh yeah it happens in the Korea terrain from the Modern Warfare Korea mod. Any ideas? Thanks

Thanks guys, problem solved.

I've been having a problem with anti ship missiles. Sea skimming missiles keep hitting the water once they level off at their cruise altitude. The missiles are being launched from a high enough altitude and are within range of the target, yet 50% of the time a AGM-84 for example will slam into the water regardless. I'll provide the weapon data from the AGM-84 to see if anyone notices a problem that might be causing the issue I'm having as I have no clue what's wrong. Also is there a way to enable a missile to be Infrared guided and also sea skimming?, because when I change a Harpoon to IR guided it no longer flies this way. Thanks [WeaponData001] TypeName=AGM-84F FullName=AGM-84F HARPOON ModelName=AGM-84E Mass=628.000000 Diameter=0.340000 Length=4.500000 SubsonicDragCoeff=0.120000 SupersonicDragCoeff=0.222000 AttachmentType=NATO,USAF,USN SpecificStationCode= NationName=USN StartYear=2000 EndYear=2040 Availability=2 BaseQuantity=28 Exported=TRUE ExportStartYear=2000 ExportEndYear=2040 ExportAvailability=2 WeaponDataType=7 FinStabilized=TRUE EffectClassName=CruiseMissileEffects ReleaseDelay=0.000000 WarheadType=6 Explosives=500.000000 FusingDistance=0.000000 ClusterBomblets=0 ClusterDispersion=0.000000 GuidanceType=7 Accuracy=98 MaxTurnRate=6.000000 MaxLaunchG=3.000000 LockonChance=98 LaunchReliability=95 ArmingTime=2.000000 SeekerFOV=25.000000 SeekerGimbleLimit=25.000000 SeekerTrackRate=15.000000 SeekerRange=60000.000000 CLmax=14.000000 MinLaunchRange=2000.000000 MaxLaunchRange=60000.000000 Duration=600.000000 CapabilityFlags=0x10100002 LoftAngle=0.000000 MaxLoftAltitude=0.000000 StartDecentRange=5.000000 DescentAngle=10.000000 MinimumAltitude=25.000000 BoosterStart=1.500000 BoosterDuration=3.200000 BoosterAccel=10.385400 BoosterEffectName=MissileFireEffect BoosterSoundName=Missile BoosterNodeName= BoosterPosition=0.000000,-1.128000,0.000000 SustainerDuration=600.000000 SustainerAccel=2.000000 SustainerEffectName= SustainerSoundName=JetEngine SustainerPosition=0.000000,-1.128000,0.000000 InFlightEffectName=MissileInFlightEffect InFlightSoundName=JetEngine ReleaseAnimationID=-1 CEP=40.000000 IsDecoy=FALSE JammerStrength=0.000000

Thanks Whiteboysamurai, I'll give it a try. I did increase the speed of the missile slightly but I guess I didn't realize how fast it was really going, very inaccurate I see now.

It's not dead to me! I personally prefer it over the DCS games (yes I own two versions of the DCS sims so I know how they work).

Pierre Sprey certainly likes to change his mind a lot to fit current events. I bet he'll change his mind on the F-35 in six months and claim he never doubted the aircraft's capabilities. No credibility for him! He claims that the "High-Low" approach is stupid, but isn't that the exact same approach that created the F-15 and F-16 40 years ago? It seems to have worked perfectly with the 15 and 16. Sure the F-16 wasn't initially meant to do everything it evolved to do, and the F-35 was designed from the start to be multi-role but what difference does that make? Is he saying we should "dumb-down" the design of the F-35 and then let it be modified and evolve over time like the F-16 did? I'm confused as to how that makes a difference. The F-35 may not be that much better than an F-16 in terms of overall combat capability and accuracy, but it incorporates stealth and modern avionics, and technology must continue to improve and evolve. That's just the way it has been and will continue to be forever. The only area that I doubt the capability of the F-35 is the CAS role when compared to the A-10. No mach 2 superfighter can fulfill the role the slow and rugged and enormously effective A-10 fulfills today. I mean come on! The A-10 will eventually need a replacement, but the F-35 is not the answer!

Thanks ikon71, that makes sense.

I've recently noticed that when using a JDAM against a target while in level flight, the bomb always continues in a shallow sloping flightpath and overshoots the target by at least a mile. I just recently noticed this because I have not used JDAM often. I have tried releasing the weapons at several different ranges and altitudes, but with no difference. I can release the bomb in a dive toward a target at close range and it will guide, but in a B-1B or B-52 this is not an ideal employment method. Just wondering if anyone else has had this problem and how to fix it.

What is the reason some target areas do not appear as a strike mission option, and only as a SEAD option? Targets such as artillery sites only work this way I've noticed. Not sure why, any ideas? Thanks

Well no luck, thanks anyways though I guess I forgot to mention that It's only the VietnamSEA terrain that has this issue. The Korea3 and IR2003 terrains for example work fine and allow you to strike artillery sites.

Thanks guys, I'll delete the SAM targets and see if that fixes it.

I am trying to add new targets to the Korea3 terrain in order to make it a little more modern. I tried adding a few silkworm missile sites and did all the required (or at least what I thought) steps to do so. I added the sites from the IR2003 terrain's Targets.ini and then added the proper Types.ini and ground objects as well. I then did all the required mods in the korea3_targets.ini such as positioning and target area numbers. It all appeared to work and the sites and targets all appeared on the games mission menu, yet when I tried to fly a strike mission against one of the sites none of the ground objects appear. The ammo bunkers and GSR etc. appear but the EW Radar and none of the missile launchers etc. appear. They appear as selectable targets before a mission but are not physically there once I start the mission. Any idea what could be going wrong? Thanks

An Il-28 is easy meat though, they're slow and low flying and the rear gunners are easy to avoid.

I'd also say no, I think it's pretty accurate and fair. Gunners of WWII bombers like the B-17 are very lethal. I was shot down many times in a FW-190 when attacking B-17s in my early days of playing SF1. When you have guns shooting every direction and 13 or more of them from each bomber you need lots of help from other aircraft as well as experience and training to survive. It was rare for a single fighter pilot in WWII to claim more than 2 or 3 bombers at a time. So the game is pretty accurate when comparing it to the real thing. In WWII it took swarms of fighters to bring down large numbers of bombers and several enemy fighters were always lost in the process to gunners. It was a numerical advantage in those times that enabled fighters to defeat bombers in large numbers. Even Egon Meyer only shot down two B-17s at the most each time and three on only one occasion. WWII gunners and guns were incredibly lethal! However when attacking a Tu-16, Tu-95, or B-52 I've always attacked from the front or side to avoid the rear gunners and only face the one or two side and top turret gunners in a Tu-16/95. I usually prevail using this tactic as I'm only facing one or two guns. Also catching a B-52 in a Mig-21 is tough to do because you must climb and drain all your airspeed to even get within missile range. Catching a Tu-16 or Tu-95 in an F-4 or Mirage III is not that difficult, but you can use missiles instead of guns first. Catching a Tu-16 in a Super Mystere is tricky though, and of course you don't have missiles to use. As mentioned by macelena, the Mig-21 was not successful in catching and shooting down B-52's in Vietnam. Even when they got within range, they were always trailing the bombers due to losing their speed in the climb and therefore were vulnerable to B-52 gunners. They learned to avoid this soon after losing two 21's to gunners of course, and all B-52's were lost to SAM's. But I still prefer to attack a Badger or Bear with a missile from an F-4 or Mirage III to avoid gunners. ECM and Chaff/Flares are the only issue there.

If anyone hasn't picked up the A-10 Osprey title yet I 100% recommend it!